The Problem with Star Wars

[barsoomcore]

When he made American Grafitti he filmed it documentary style with a handheld camera, and did several set pieces using rock music instead of an orchestral score.

Exactly the way Jean-Luc Godard did in "Bande A Part" ten years earlier?

Mm, radical.

 

[Desdichado]

Seems I'm not good at getting my point across. My point isn't that is has to be good since it makes a lot of money...but that Lucas HAS TO BE DOING SOMETHING RIGHT.

A very common claim that has been (incorrectly) made numerous times in this thread by multiple posters is that by saying Lucas did X, Y or Z poorly, then I must be saying he did EVERYTHING poorly, which directly contradicts what I actually said. Of COURSE, he's doing something right. That doesn't mean he's doing everything right.

 

[myrdden]

It's called dramtic irony. The audience knows what's going on when the protagonists don't. I really don't see a problem with Lucas taking this approach anyway.

The dramatic irony approach pretty much requires the viewer to watch IV, V and VI before I, II & III. If this was Lucas' intention that all subsequent audiences should watch the movies in the above order then the approach works. Personally I feel in order to reap the greatest effect from watching these movies, a person needs to watch them in that order. Watching then sequentially, IMO, lessens the impact of the movies for the viewer.

YMMV, of course.

 

[myrdden]

Seems I'm not good at getting my point across. My point isn't that is has to be good since it makes a lot of money...but that Lucas HAS TO BE DOING SOMETHING RIGHT. No matter what anyone says about his directing/etc, he's obviously doing it right because all the evidence points to that. The only thing not pointing to it are a bunch of people all over the internet who complain...but really, isn't that what the internet was made for in the first place?

Sure he's doing somethings right but I don't think that is what some are arguing in this thread. It's more along the lines of failed potential. People see a huge potential in the story of these movies and it isn't meeting the potential/expectation. I'll agree that the expectations are quite high. Quite frankly its possible that Lucas could never have fulfilled such expectations.

Personally I think the metaplot is great, but the execution has been off. I think some of his decisions weren't optimal for telling the story. With this incarnation of the ST story, the devil is in the details. We know how the plot is going to go, so characterization becomes much more important. IMO, the characters are not endearing like the first trilogy. Some of the plot points (such as the romance between Anakin and Padme) are way too clunky in their execution.

The movies have been ok and I don't hate them as a whole, but I am disappointed with certain facets of their execution which does detract from the experience as a whole.

 

[Staffan]

Because I don't like bad movies. I like good movies. I think most people are like this. The set of movies I think are good is exactly equal to the set of movies I like.

So, no "guilty pleasures" when you watch movies? I mean, I can say that Barbarian Brothers is a pretty darn bad movie, but I still like it.

 

[Vigilance]

Exactly the way Jean-Luc Godard did in "Bande A Part" ten years earlier?

Mm, radical.

Radical enough that only the influence of his mentor and big cheese Coppola allowed the movie to be made that way, how's that?

Chuck

 

[The Serge]

And this is a whole different matter. Technical awards shouldn't be looked down on as less that the "Important" awards. Not pointing at you directly, because its a fairly common thing that just bothers me.

They are less important films from the human drama element. True, the technical expertise in many films is essential for the kinds of films associated with "our" genres. LotRs would not have been as successful without the kind of technical talent needed to bring the world to life (whether visually due to costume design, CGI, etc., or through audio, like Howard Shore's phenomenal scores). However, these awards are simply "supporting casts;" yes, they are important, but the best technical skill will not help save a film floundering due to poor writing, acting, directing, and the like.

Art direction, costumes, set design, etc are just as important, if not more important to movies than the actors and the directors and the writers. But like I said, completely different matter.

I disagree that this is a different matter. I think it's tied directly into what I was saying at the very beginning of this thread (which, I'm flattered to see, has lasted so long). As I just said a few posts ago, Lucas should be commended for driving the technical side of the industry. Without his effort in this area, there wouldn't be LotR or these prequels... At least not as great. It's in this area, along with his ability to come up with great concepts and story foundations, that he excels. However, when it comes to directing, writing, capturing the human elements/drama, he's abyssmal and incompetent.

 

[Vigilance]

A very common claim that has been (incorrectly) made numerous times in this thread by multiple posters is that by saying Lucas did X, Y or Z poorly, then I must be saying he did EVERYTHING poorly, which directly contradicts what I actually said. Of COURSE, he's doing something right. That doesn't mean he's doing everything right.

Well I have no problem saying "I wish he'd done X or Y".

But people are going way beyond that and saying "Lucas is the problem, he needs to take a back seat".

Let's face it, is everything BAD with the franchise Lucas' fault?

Sure.

But everything RIGHT with the franchise has to be his too right?

Chuck

 

[The Serge]

So what? Most of the time these Oscars are given out people who are Academy favorites, not necessarily to people who were the best. The Oscars to me is little more than Hollywood patting itself on the back. They mean nothing. Hell, the Oscars were only a few weeks ago, and I couldn't even tell you who took those awards except for Clint Eastwood. That's how much I care, and I'm sure I'm hardly alone.

Tell it to the one to whom I was responding when I brought up the question of the kinds of Academy nominations and awards Lucas has won. I suspect you and that person are otherwise in agreement.

 

[The Serge]

See I have no problem criticizing the films. Many of the comments I've made haven't been directed at you, even though you were original poster.

I know your comments weren't directed specifically to me. I just read the Oscar comment and decided I needed to say something about it is all.

Saying you wish they were done differently is cool, I just have a hard time with characterizing George Lucas as incompetent.

I'm not sure I understand why there's a problem with characterizing the man in such a light, particularly when I and others have made it clear that his incompetence is limited to certain, albeit extremely important, things with regards to movie making.

When he made American Grafitti he filmed it documentary style with a handheld camera, and did several set pieces using rock music instead of an orchestral score.

This was radical at the time, however, how many movies and TV shows are filmed this way now? It got him nominated for best director.

Yes, it did. He was a great director at the time and was in touch with human beings and what drives us.

As for Star Wars, its one of the most popular and enduring sci-fi franchises ever.

I just don't think incompetent film makers or bad story tellers create things that lasting.

Well, let's remember that I've always said Lucas is a great conceptualist. To have a great idea or story arc doesn't mean that one knows how to execute it. Aside from A New Hope, Lucas has done an poor job on the execution side of directing his most popular franchise. I don't think this means that he's bad at coming up with great ideas; he's just bad with seeing them to quality fruition.